KEY POINTS:
It will never be known exactly what 16 people allegedly gathered in the Ureweras with guns and other weapons were planning - or whether they were planning anything at all.
Hundreds of pages of intercepted conversations between members of the group can never go before the court or
into the public domain after the collapse of the police effort to bring charges under the Terrorism Suppression Act.
Intercept warrants were granted under that act - passed in 2002 - so the evidence is inadmissible for any charges brought under other laws.
But Solicitor-General David Collins said on Thursday there was no other legislation available under which the intercepted communications could have been gathered. "We've looked very, very carefully to see if there was another more appropriate [way of getting the evidence]. It's unlikely there was any other way to get that evidence."
Despite the collapse of the terrorism allegations, Dr Collins described much of the evidence as "very disturbing".
And he said police had had to satisfy High Court judges on more than one occasion that they had "sufficient evidence and justification for doing what they did".
More than 300 police were involved in the raids on October 15.
The Maori Party and other critics have slammed the operation as heavy-handed and called for the resignation of Police Commissioner Howard Broad.
But Dr Collins reserved his criticism for the legislation, which has now been referred to the Law Commission for consideration.
And he said that if the legislation had been framed differently terrorism charges could have been brought.
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters, who is sponsoring the third reading of the Terrorism Suppression Amendment Bill, said Parliament had "let the police down and let the agencies of this country down and we've got to have it fixed up".
"It's not the police who are responsible, it's all of us."
Mr Broad would not be interviewed yesterday.
A police spokeswoman refused to comment on whether other charges would be pursued with the evidence gathered.
She said advice was being sought from the Crown Law Office on what would happen to the evidence gathered under the Terrorism Suppression Act.
The only clue as to what sort of things were talked about is from intercepts of one of the suspects, Jamie Lockett, which were released by police appealing for him to stay in prison between court appearances instead of being freed on bail.
Much of what he said was suppressed, but the Weekend Herald can still report three sentences which were left in the public domain.
* "I'm training up to be a vicious, dangerous commando."
* "White men are going to die in this country."
* "I'm at war. I'm declaring war on this country very soon."
Dr Collins said evidence gathered by way of intercept warrants issued under the Terrorism Suppression Act was unlikely ever to go before a court, which he admitted was frustrating.
But there was a "significant body" of evidence that would still be used in court for charges under the Arms Act, including some video surveillance footage and photographs.
Standard of proof
Solicitor-General David Collins said to lay charges there had to be evidence that:
1) The group was attempting to advance an ideological, political or religious cause;
2) Its intention was to induce terror in a civilian population or force a government to do or abstain from doing any act.
If there was evidence of that, he would also need evidence for each of the 12 suspects that:
3) The suspect was participating in the group;
4) The suspect knew the group was a terrorist entity (as defined in 1 and 2);
5) The suspect knew the group participated in carrying out terrorist acts;
6) The suspect participated in the group to enhance the ability of the group to carry out terrorist acts.
Dr Collins said there was insufficient evidence to satisfy the "multiple motives" needed under the legislation.
"It's necessary to prove intent on many, many levels and in many circumstances and in my view the evidence fell short of meeting the very technical requirements."
